Search

The article highlights the U13 Bench-to-Bedside (B2B) conference series, a collaborative effort by the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) and the National Institute on Aging. Topics include the transition of the AGS/National Institute on Aging (NIA) U13 B2B conference series from 2004 to 2017, progressive exploration of key issues in geriatrics reflected in the series of conferences, and an overview of the conferences in the series from 2018 to 2023.

Objectives To prioritize research topics relevant to the care of the growing population of older adults with multiple chronic conditions ( MCCs). Design Survey of experts in MCC practice, research, and policy. Topics were derived from white papers, funding announcements, or funded research projects relating to older adults with MCCs. Setting Survey conducted through the Health Care Systems Research Network ( HCSRN) and Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Centers ( OAICs) Advancing Geriatrics Infrastructure and Network Growth Initiative, a joint endeavor of the HCSRN and OAICs. Participants Individuals affiliated with the HCSRN or OAICs and national MCC experts, including individuals affiliated with funding agencies having MCC-related grant portfolios. Measurements A 'top box' methodology was used, counting the number of respondents selecting the top response on a 5-point Likert scale and dividing by the total number of responses to calculate a top box percentage for each of 37 topics. Results The highest-ranked research topics relevant to the health and healthcare of older adults with MCCs were health-related quality of life in older adults with MCCs; development of assessment tools (to assess, e.g., symptom burden, quality of life, function); interactions between medications, disease processes, and health outcomes; disability; implementation of novel (and scalable) models of care; association between clusters of chronic conditions and clinical, financial, and social outcomes; role of caregivers; symptom burden; shared decision-making to enhance care planning; and tools to improve clinical decision-making. Conclusion Study findings serve to inform the development of a comprehensive research agenda to address the challenges relating to the care of this 'high-need, high-cost' population and the healthcare delivery systems responsible for serving it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Older women experience disability more commonly than their male peers. This disparity may be due, in part, to sex-based differences in the prevalence or the disabling effects of common medical conditions. The objectives of this analysis were to (a) quantify the extent to which excess disability in women is explained by higher prevalence of selected medical conditions and (b) evaluate whether the same conditions have differing effects on disability in men and women. Methods. We analyzed cross-sectional data from 5,888 community-dwelling older men and women. Disability was defined as difficulty with greater than or equal to one activity of daily living. Thirteen medical conditions were assessed by self-report, testing, or record review. Results. Controlling for age, race, education, and marital status, women were more likely to experience disability (odds ratio = 1.70, 95% confidence interval = 1.36–2.11). Higher prevalence of arthritis and obesity in women explained 30.2% and 12.9%, respectively, of the sex-based difference in disability rates, whereas male prevalent diseases like vascular conditions and emphysema narrowed the disability gap. Women with arthritis, hearing problems, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, stroke, and claudication were more likely to exhibit disability compared with men with the same conditions (p < .001). Conclusions. Efforts to lessen sex-based inequality in disability should focus on reducing the prevalence of arthritis and obesity. Future generations may see greater functional disparity if rates of vascular disease and emphysema rise among women. Several conditions were more often associated with disability in women, suggesting additional sex-based differences in the disablement process. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]